FCC official retires amid complaints about porn viewing

Home » In the News » FCC official retires amid complaints about porn viewing

Posted December 1st, 2017.

As It Appeared On

By MARGARET HARDING MCGILL 12/01/2017 04:51 PM EST

A senior FCC official quietly retired this year after allegations surfaced that he had used his work computer to view pornography, the latest in a series of porn-viewing incidents that agency investigators have uncovered in the past two years.

An investigation that began in January found “pornographic and inappropriate images” indicating the employee used his FCC-issued computer and the agency’s network in violation of commission policy, according to a new report from the FCC’s office of inspector general.

The employee, who is not identified, retired from his senior level position in June, the report said. The document says he worked at the GS-15 level, which earns as much as $161,900 a year.

Since 2015, internal affairs investigators have alleged that at least six FCC employees have accessed porn using work devices, according to IG reports. One investigation last year found “images appearing to be child pornography” on an employee’s FCC-issued computer as well as other pornographic material. The agency contacted the FBI in that case.

The revelations come amid heightened scrutiny of sexual misconduct across the media, entertainment and tech industries as well as the federal government.

Two of the FCC employees in the alleged porn incidents have been terminated, but one of those is appealing the termination, according to the IG’s office. FCC spokesman Mark Wigfield said the agency has proposed removal of all six employees identified by IG investigators. He declined to name them.

The FCC believes viewing pornography in the workplace is “completely unacceptable,” Wigfield said.

“The agency takes all allegations involving pornography extremely seriously, and investigates them thoroughly,” he said in an emailed statement. “The agency takes disciplinary action against any employee found to have accessed or viewed such materials using FCC resources.”

The spokesman added that the FCC uses filtering tools for both web and email content to limit access to pornography on FCC resources. It also requires annual cybersecurity training for all employees on the appropriate use of FCC computers, and informs employees they are subject to monitoring, he said.

Other federal agencies have also faced problems with porn-watching employees in recent years, including two EPA staffers who were caught watching hours of pornography at work — along with a third who was sent to prison after using an agency loaner laptop to view obscene images of children. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers expressed outrage in 2015 that the agency typically placed such employees on paid leave instead of immediately firing them.

At the FCC, the issue first sparked headlines after a female employee working as a women’s outreach specialist filed a federal lawsuit in 2015 alleging that a male co-worker repeatedly viewed pornography in an adjacent cubicle. According to the complaint, the man would invite others to watch the pornography with him and she could hear “groans.”

The woman said she experienced a hostile work environment and faced retaliation after she complained about the behavior. A federal court in September ruled largely in favor of the FCC, saying that while the conduct was “undeniably repugnant, it was not discriminatory,” because the porn-viewing was not targeted at her. The FCC is in mediation on a remaining complaint that she faced retaliation by being removed from some of her job duties, according to court records.

The woman still works at the FCC, as does the man who viewed the pornography, her attorney Noah Peters said. Peters said she complained for years about his behavior before filing the lawsuit.

“Anybody but the federal government would have fired him, and would have been able to,” Peters said, adding that the female employee works from home several days a week. “It absolutely poisoned her entire career.”

Wigfield, the FCC spokesman, declined to comment on the litigation. He said the FCC is dedicated “to ensuring a work environment free from harassment, and is committed to educating employees and taking appropriate action to prevent and address such conduct.”

Looking at pornography repeatedly, and having it be known throughout the office, could create a hostile work environment, said Kate Mueting, a partner at the law firm Sanford Heisler Sharp who works on employment discrimination cases. It could also be a factor in lawsuits alleging discrimination based on gender, especially if the person viewing the pornography is a supervisor.

“If a decision-maker is involved in looking at pornography in the workplace, that is evidence of intent or motive,” Mueting said. “That could be a manager who doesn’t view women as professionals — even in the workplace, he’s viewing women in a sexualized manner.”

But it could also be a difficult case to make if the viewing is done privately, even in the workplace.

“I think it would take an unusual situation for it to amount to sexual harassment if the employee who is viewing the pornography is just viewing it himself,” said Nan Hunter, a law professor at Georgetown University with expertise in gender and sexuality legal issues.

“I think it would depend on the facts,” she said, adding that it’s difficult to imagine a situation where one person viewing pornography could create a “severe and pervasive” hostile environment for others.

Sanford Heisler Sharp, LLP is a public interest law firm representing individuals and groups against corporations and governmental entities. The firm also represents individual citizens when a corporation is committing an act of fraud against the U.S. Government. As a private attorney general, Sanford Heisler Sharp, LLP specializes in a number of areas: employment discrimination, Title VII, ERISA, and wage and hour cases; representation of executives and attorneys; qui tam and whistleblower matters; consumer fraud; housing discrimination; mass torts; complex civil litigation; and, appellate litigation.